Allowed

Indian Bank v. M/s. Balaji Enterprises

DRT26 Mar 2024TA/143/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The tribunal allowed a transferable decree application filed by Indian Bank against Balaji Enterprises. The court validated the claim of Rs. 2.81 crores, noting it was within limitation. Due to inordinate delay in curing defects and calculating interest, future interest was fixed at 9% simple per annum instead of the contractual rate.

What did the court decide?

Recovery Certificate issued for Rs. 2,81,56,550/ with future interest @ 9% simple p.a. from filing date, recoverable jointly and severally from the defendants.

Indian Bank versus M/s. Balaji Enterprises — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2024)

¶1

BEFORE THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL –II AT CHENNAI

¶2

Dated this 26^th day of March, 2024

¶3

PRESENT: SHRI T. RAJESH

¶4

PRESIDING OFFICER

¶5

TA No.143 of 2023

¶6

(Originally filed before DRT-I Chennai as OA No.137 of 2021 and thereafter transferred to this Tribunal and renumbered as TA No.143 of 2023)

¶7

Indian Bank Rep. by its Chief Manager, Vadapalani Branch 101/4, Periyar Pathai West Thirunagar Chennai – 600 106 … Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

M/s. Balaji Enterprises Rep. by its Partners Carrying on business at no. 114 LIC, Thirukatchur TNHB Keela Karani – 603 204 Kancheepuram District

¶10

Factory & Godown at Survey No.328/1AI, Ninnakarai village Maraimalai Nagar, Chengalpattu Taluk Kancheepuram district

¶11

Mr. A Shankar S/o. Arumugham Partner of M/s Balaji Enterprises No.8, Thattar street, Ward no.15 Jayakondan, Perambalur – 621 802 …Defendants Counsel for the Applicant Bank : M/s R.R.K. Associates Counsel for Defendants : Ex-parte

¶12

FINAL ORDER

¶13

The Application is filed Under Section 19 (1) of the Recovery of Debt And Bankruptcy Act, 1993 seeking for issuance of a Recovery Certificate for Rs.2,81,56,550/- (Rupees Two Crores Eighty One Lakhs Fifty Six Thousand

¶14

¶15

Five Hundred Fifty only) due in OCC credit facility availed by the 1^st defendant represented by its Partners, the 2^nd and 3^rd defendants.

¶16

The above TA was originally filed before DRT-I and got transferred to this Tribunal and renumbered as above.

¶17

The Applicant contents that a credit facilities of Rs. 2,00,00,000/- as OCC was availed by the 1^st defendant represented by 2^nd and 3^rd defendant. It is also stated that the facility is secured by hypothecation of movables such as stocks and book debts and mortgage of immovable property. It is also stated that the 2^nd and 3^rd defendants had executed guarantee agreements.

¶18

The Applicant further contents that despite availing the credit facility by obliging to pay back the amount, the defendant failed in compliance of the same, resulting the account being classified as NPA on 29.6.2018. All the efforts of the Applicant to make the defendants pay back the amount failed forcing the Applicant to file this Application.

¶19

Summons was taken out and as the defendant failed to appear they were set exparte on 2.6.2022 and 3^rd defendant had filed reply statement admitting the disbursement and defaults.

¶20

The Applicant let in evidence through AW1, filed proof affidavit confirming with the pleadings and got marked Ext A1 to A20.

¶21

Heard, the following issues arise for consideration: -

¶22

(i) Whether the Applicant had proved the TA claim?

¶23

(ii) What orders are to be passed?

¶24

¶25

Both these issues are decided together.

¶26

The Applicant evidence remains un-rebutted and hence proved. The documents produced by the Applicant are found to be admissible and are sufficient to prove TA claim. Hence the Applicant is to be found entitled for the TA claim. The TA claim is made within limitation and there is no capitalization of penal interest.

¶27

The bank had filed a part satisfaction memo as SR.9534/2023 dated 9.11.2023 recording recovery of Rs.1,26,25,000/- through the sale of the schedule properties.

¶28

Taking into consideration the fact that the TA claim is arrived at by calculating interest at contractual rate, which this Tribunal considered as on the higher side and there is inordinate delay in even curing the defects after filing the TA and in filing the proof affidavit pendente lite and future interest is awarded at 9% simple.

¶29

In view of the above, the following order is passed: -

¶30

(a) TA No.143 of 2023 stands allowed.

¶31

(b) Applicant is permitted to recover an amount of Rs. 2,81,56,550/(Rupees Two Crores Eighty One Lakhs Fifty Six Thousand Five Hundred Fifty only) with future and pendente lite interest @ 9 % simple P.A from the date of filing of the OA/TA till realization, after giving credit to all the amount recovered and received during the pendency of the OA/TA, from the defendants jointly, severally and personally against defendants 2 and 3 and also by proceedings against defendant’s assets.

¶32

¶33

I A Recovery Certificate is to be drawn and issued to the recovery Officer to enable recovery of the as per the above terms.

¶34

(d) Applicant is allowed to realize cost of the proceeding for which cost memo is to be filed in 7 days’ time from the date of receipt of the copy of the order.

¶35

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned in terms of section

¶36

19(21)(i) of the RDB Act, read with Rule 6 of DRT (Procedure) Rules, 1993.

¶37

(Dictated to PS, transcribed by him, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the Open court, this the 26^th day of March, 2024)

¶38

Sd/(T.RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER DRT-II, CHENNAI

¶39

Indian Bank v. M/s. Balaji Enterprises

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Indian Bank v. M/s. Balaji Enterprises

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bamk of Baroda versus S. Indira

Indian Overseas Bank versus Muthukumar

Bank of Baroda versus . G. Rajesh

State Bank of India versus Cm Atheequr Rahman Co.

State Bank of India versus P. Kaviyarasan

Idbi Bank Limited versus Mr. D. Santhoshkumar